MMOGs as Balanced Systems

2006/01/31

As much as I go on about needing more "world" in the very game-y MMOGs being developed these days, I don't mind there being game aspects within the world. In fact, I think a successful MMOG needs both.

The big thing I've been headed toward lately is what I'd call "balanced focus." (Or "focused balance.") That is, pick one or two key experiences you want your subscribers to enjoy, and focus your entire design on providing those experiences... but be sure that the actual features that generate those experiences are balanced for breadth and depth.

In other words, first decide how your players should feel when they end a session of your game: tired, exhilarated, pumped, satiated, clever, happy, proud, etc. Then, as you imagine what features can produce the feeling you want, try to balance them within each system and across all systems so that everything adds up to the same effect.

By "balancing within a system" (balancing for depth) I mean trying to insure that both the low levels and high levels of any system are enjoyable, and that they feed back appropriately with each other. This is the kind of thing I'm trying to achieve when I yap about having tactical, operational, and strategic levels of gameplay -- each should be fun in and of itself, but each should also supply something useful to the other levels and depend on resources supplied by the other levels. This internal balancing process makes each system coherent.

By "balancing across systems" (balancing for breadth) I'm trying to describe making the whole supersystem coherent as a persistent environment. Consider the range of systems often developed for a MMOG:

• economics
• lore/backstory
• physics
• crafting
• graphics and sound
• quests/missions
• mob AI
• socialization
• travel
• communication
• exploration/discovery
• grouping
• character maintenance
• combat

MMOG designers also have to make high-level choices for systems:

• fear/anger/terror vs. sense of humor
• hardcoded anti-griefing measures vs. player policing
• character advancement vs. complete characters
• classes/levels vs. standalone skills
• rewards for destruction vs. rewards for construction
• XP earned through player action vs. real-time skill improvement
• permadeath vs. cloning/resurrection

Every one of these choices (and many more I haven't listed) should all be balanced among themselves so that no one system takes over the game. If one or two game systems get too much attention relative to the others, you'll wind up with a product that's too much a simulation, or too much a button-masher, or that in some way fails to be fully focused on achieving the emotional result state you want your subscribers to experience. Balancing systems with and across each other aligns them to produce the strongest possible effect.

Which is a long-winded way of saying I think a MMOG with aspirations of being a AAA title needs to be both a satisfying world _and_ a fun game for as many people as possible. A MMOG is going to be both lived in (world) and played in (game), and to be successful needs to try to accomplish both of these goals in one seamless product.